Hello, new yet no so new!

by WAHMlaw Mon Jan 29, 2018 3:18 am

I am so happy to see this forum alive again! I was a lurking member of the old site for about 5 years and have finally gotten the pieces together enough to make a claim. When I came looking and found the site was sold I tought I'd have to go it alone, yet here most of you are!! I'd like to ask a question in another forum topic about the letters but it seems I don't have permission to post anywhere but here.

My question is, how do we know if a debt has been SOLD to a debt collector or just assigned to one for collecting? Here in USAinc., lawyers offices send letters saying they are debt collectors but then show up to court and they they are representing their client. So when we sue them we highlight that they acted as debt collectors but they claim in their response they were acting on behalf of their client, the bank and therefore "immune" to suit for liability.

by Ausk Mon Jan 29, 2018 9:07 am

As i understand these things, countries who have inherited the British justice system, have similar legal systems.

For example, many of our commonwealth laws in Australia are laws that were passed by the British parliament yet they form part of our constitution. However only the British parliament can change these laws.

Debt collectors who have purchased the debt off the original creditor will say something along the lines of "we have been assigned your debt from xyz.

Debt collectors who are agents of the creditors will usually say that they are representing xyz company.

Letters from lawyers will are a bit different because they also talk about 'their client.'

Perhaps when communicating with them in writing in the first instance you might like to consider asking them " what laws are you relying on for your authority to contact me regarding this matter?

By phrasing it like this they have to reveal the law they claim gives them power to deal with you on the matter,

by **assassin** Tue Jan 30, 2018 1:58 am

Hi and welcome; feel free to enter debates and give a thought or opinion.

by WAHMlaw Tue Jan 30, 2018 8:29 pm

Ausk wrote:As i understand these things, countries who have inherited the British justice system, have similar legal systems.

By phrasing it like this they have to reveal the law they claim gives them power to deal with you on the matter,

This is great question! However the tactic that is used here in USAinc by liarholes is to send correspondence that says on it's face, "this is an attempt to collect a debt" but when it goes to court they stand as representative of a client as attorneys of client. They do not respond to any questions at all! They wait until we sue to claim they are merely working on behalf of client but all evidence sent says "debt collector"... the definition in commerce does "include lawyers whose primary business is collecting debts".

by Tiggy Wed Jan 31, 2018 12:48 pm

What are you suing for exactly ??

by WAHMlaw Fri Feb 02, 2018 5:17 am

Tiggy wrote:What are you suing for exactly ??

I'm suing for mail fraud, conversion, unjust enrichment, conspiracy and uttering.

by Tiggy Fri Feb 02, 2018 11:51 am

Here in the UK when a debt is assigned it means it's been sold under section 136 of the Law of Property Act 1925.

If a debt collector is acting as an agent only they always write in their letters that they are acting on behalf of their named client.

by WAHMlaw Fri Feb 02, 2018 6:46 pm

It may be different here because a lawyer office can also be a debt collector company. They will post on letters "original creditor; current creditor" but it's always kept as the dead/defunct/out of business bank OR mortgage servicer which also call themselves "debt collectors" on their letters. However, without fail, when they are sued as men/woman they claim that they were just agents for the bank/servicer even though they may have bought the debt directly. The never produce an Agent Agreement from the bank or servicer either.

In our claim we declare them to be debt collectors at all time relevant to the case because we don't have evidence that they bought the debt nor are actually hired as counsel for the bank/servicer.

by Sponsored content

Hello, new yet no so new!

Hello, new yet no so new!

Re: Hello, new yet no so new!

Re: Hello, new yet no so new!

Re: Hello, new yet no so new!

Re: Hello, new yet no so new!

Re: Hello, new yet no so new!

Re: Hello, new yet no so new!

Re: Hello, new yet no so new!

Re: Hello, new yet no so new!